The fundamental paradox of democracy

Theorizing the origins of the moon is considerably easier than crafting a theory for a peaceful life on earth. The universe is regular in that it does not change its behavior for profitability. On the other hand, social theories must take into account the fact that there is an abundance of anomalies amongst us carrying the genes of indecency, corruption and deception. This article is written with the hope that we still have a chance to regain our democracy for the sake of our children.

In a pack, as far as the alpha male is concerned the law is that no other males will engage in mating activities with females of his choice. As the pack grows in size the alpha male appoints loyal beta males to smaller packs who may further appoint gamma males to serve them, and so on. That is the social system of Saudi Arabia, and yet we are surprised of all the unrest from that country. Even the name of the country is the last name of the alpha male.

In a fertile land where farmers could produce food from soil and cattle, we see a more elaborate system of laws as the commandments, 10 of which have stood the test of time as being applicable to all human societies. Whether the laws were handed over from the Creator Himself to Moses, or came about as traditions due to circumstances, is a matter of fate. The point here is to cite a major example of the notion of social laws protecting individual rights in a society.

Mohammad emphasized the significance of specific physical penalties for failure to follow the laws. After all, it is only appropriate to have earthly punishments for breaking the laws of God on earth. Indeed, we are so obsessed with the notion of democracy that we tend to overlook the significance of more primitive building blocks for social order.

The primitive laws are so fundamental that all nations have conceived them in their own ways. For instance, we used to hang a human who was thought to have stolen a horse, even when we had a democratic system in place. The point of this discussion is to emphasize the significance of earthly punishment associated with breaking a given law.

As a final example, consider a simple contemporary case. When I am unable to pay the property tax on my car, my action is illegal. I will be arrested, fined etc. The question is not whether I simply forgot to renew my car tag, or I am unable to pay. All that matters is failing to follow the law, regardless of the circumstances that caused me to do so. Like any other law, there are penalties associated with my failure that will be exercised against me. This is as it is supposed to be.

Now, administrative failures in enforcing the laws of a country are not considered as failure to follow any law. Stated differently, we trust a president would sacrifice his life for the well being of his nation in the same spirit as youngsters sacrifice their lives in protecting their nation. Therefore, no one ever thought of constitutional ingredients that could be used as a basis for laws against failing to uphold the law by the executive branch.

As we are witnessing, a democracy can be hijacked. Once this happens, failures to enforce the laws of nation will be the result of negligence, and at times deliberation. It is a good time to focus on establishing the criteria for penalizing a president who fails to enforce the laws, rather than being satisfied with resignation of his cabinet members. To that end, we need laws regarding the failure to enforce the laws, as well as the criteria that determines such failure.

What should matter is the failure, not the cause of failure precisely as a person is discharged for failing to follow a certain procedure. Obviously the definition of failure in the context of running a country is quite complex. However, presently we are experiencing a graphic example to guide us.

It is generally believed that candidates win elections by receiving the majority of votes. Surprisingly, the majority seems to ask the elected candidates to pass and enforce the laws that benefit only a small fraction of the population. This phenomenon is the fundamental paradox of democracy.